Time to complain about pain: Children's self-reported procedural pain in a randomised control trial of Hall and conventional stainless steel crown techniques.

BACKGROUND: Children's pain in dentistry has undesirable short- and long-term consequences; therefore, less invasive treatments merit consideration. AIM: To investigate procedural pain scores for two treatments for carious primary molars in New Zealand primary care. DESIGN: This study was a split-mouth randomised control trial, with secondary outcome analysis. Children (4-8 years) with proximal carious lesions on matched primary molars had one tooth treated with the Hall technique (HT) and one treated with a conventional stainless steel crown (CT); treatment type and order of treatment were randomly allocated (allocation concealment). The Wong-Baker self-report pain scale measured pretreatment dental pain, procedural pain at each treatment and post-operative pain. RESULTS: Data were analysed for 103 children: 49 children had the HT first and 54 children had the CT first. Procedural pain scores did not differ by treatment type, with 71.8% and 76.7% of children reporting low pain for the HT and the CT, respectively. Fewer children reported low procedural pain for the second treatment than the first (p = .047). Most children reported low procedural pain for both treatments (58.3%), although 41.7% experienced moderate-high procedural pain with at least one treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The HT caused pain for as many children as the CT. There is an opportunity for better dental pain management in this setting.

Dental high-speed handpiece and ultrasonic scaler aerosol generation levels and the effect of suction and air supply.

OBJECTIVE: Exposure to aerosol spray generated by high-speed handpieces (HSHs) and ultrasonic scalers poses a significant health risk to oral health practitioners from airborne pathogens. Aerosol generation varies with different HSH designs, but to date, no study has measured this. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured and compared aerosol generation by (1) dental HSHs with 3 different coolant port designs and (2) ultrasonic scalers with no suction, low-volume evacuation (LVE) or high-volume evacuation (HVE). Measurements used a particle counter placed near the operator's face in a single-chair, mechanically ventilated dental surgery. Volume concentrations of aerosol, totaled across a 0.3-25-µm size range, were compared for each test condition. RESULTS: HSH drilling and scaling produced significantly high aerosol levels (P < .001) with total volume concentrations 4.73×108µm3/m3 and 4.18×107µm3/m3, respectively. For scaling, mean volume of aerosol was highest with no suction followed by LVE and HVE (P < .001). We detected a negative correlation with both LVE and HVE, indicating that scaling with suction improved operator safety. For drilling, simulated cavity preparation with a 1-port HSH generated the most aerosol (P < .01), followed by a 4-port HSH. Independent of the number of cooling ports, lack of suction caused higher aerosol volume (1.98×107 µm3/m3) whereas HVE significantly reduced volume to -4.47×105 µm3/m3. CONCLUSIONS: High concentrations of dental aerosol found during HSH cavity preparation or ultrasonic scaling present a risk of infection, confirming the advice to use respiratory PPE. HVE and LVE both effectively reduced aerosol generation during scaling, whereas the new aerosol-reducing 'no air' function was highly effective and can be recommended for HSH drilling.